What do you think?
Rate this book
Truth Machine
Imagine a world in which no one can lie. Now try to imagine the consequences. Halperin has written this generation's 1984, and rarely have our customers praised a book more highly. (Click on the title, and find out what they have to say ... assuming they are telling the truth!) And only time will tell whether Halperin's book is speculative fiction, or inverse history. Very Highly Recommended.
416 pages, Mass Market Paperback
First published January 1, 1996
62 people are currently reading
941 people want to read
About the author
James L. Halperin
113books24followersJames L. Halperin is an American author and businessman. He attended Harvard University between 1970-1971, where he majored in psychology and later philosophy. After three semesters, Halperin took a permanent leave of absence to pursue a career in numismatics. In 1976, he established a rare coin fund for investors, New England Rare Coin Fund (NERCF). Upon liquidation at auction in April 1980, each investor in NERCF received 460% of their initial investment after commissions and fees.
In 1982, he sold his coin company to a former employee, entered into a 50/50 business partnership with renowned numismatist Steve Ivy and settled in Dallas, Texas. Halperin and Ivy still co-direct Heritage Auction Galleries, of Dallas, Texas, which advertises itself as the world's largest rare coin company and third largest auction house.
Halperin also endows The James & Gayle Halperin Foundation, which supports several health and education-related charities.
He has been married to his wife Gayle since 1984 and they have two sons, David and Michael.
In 1982, he sold his coin company to a former employee, entered into a 50/50 business partnership with renowned numismatist Steve Ivy and settled in Dallas, Texas. Halperin and Ivy still co-direct Heritage Auction Galleries, of Dallas, Texas, which advertises itself as the world's largest rare coin company and third largest auction house.
Halperin also endows The James & Gayle Halperin Foundation, which supports several health and education-related charities.
He has been married to his wife Gayle since 1984 and they have two sons, David and Michael.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 156 reviews
December 13, 2022
I first read The Truth Machine when it came out almost 30 years ago. The backdrop of the story—that crime is the overwhelming problem in our society—feels much more like a 1990s idea. And it’s not the best-written book I’ve read. Even the main character, Pete, is not fully fleshed out and the remaining characters, especially the women, are woefully underdeveloped.
But Mr. Halperin predicted several political and technological changes that have come to pass in the past 30 years (though he certainly missed on others). And the core of The Truth Machine’s story—imagining all of the different ways our society would change if you knew to a certainty that the person talking to you was telling the truth—is still thought-provoking. If that type of story appeals to you, The Truth Machine is a quick, interesting read.
But Mr. Halperin predicted several political and technological changes that have come to pass in the past 30 years (though he certainly missed on others). And the core of The Truth Machine’s story—imagining all of the different ways our society would change if you knew to a certainty that the person talking to you was telling the truth—is still thought-provoking. If that type of story appeals to you, The Truth Machine is a quick, interesting read.
December 10, 2021
4.5 stars rounded up.
I am astounded at how much I enjoyed this book. It was written in 1996, and the story goes from 1991-2050. Every chapter starts with a brief summary of what happened in the world during that time, and at times the story is a bit prescient. The story is narrated by a computer, an Intel 22g CP, and written in a dispassionate, journalistic style, which really fits the story. The computer wrote the story in seven minutes, but it took his owner, a journalist 2 1/2 days to edit it.
The story starts with the world waiting for the verdict in the trial of Randall Peterson Armstrong (Pete), who is the genius inventor of The Truth Machine, which has dramatically changed the world for the better. His company, Armstrong Technologies, Inc. (ATI) has developed numerous computer systems which have benefited mankind in innumerable ways. But his biggest invention is The Truth Machine, (ACIP) which can tell with 100% accuracy if a person is telling the truth or lying. New laws are enacted that require that people submit to being “scipped � in order to hold office, obtain employment, travel internationally, get any type of license (including a parental license) or a myriad of other things. Crime becomes almost nonexistent, personal and international relationships improve, and people are generally better off because everyone must be honest. (Eventually the ACIP becomes small enough to wear on the wrist, a so you can always know the veracity of what people are saying.)
The story gives Pete’s backstory, how he was a genius at a very young age, suffered a tragedy in his family, entered Harvard at age 11, met some people who would become lifelong friends (or not) and eventually became the richest, most brilliant man in the world and changed humanity for the better. He suffered from some personality quirks, was very driven by his ambition to develop the Truth Machine, and with the exception of a few hiccups along the way, lived an exemplary life. Unfortunately, it was those “hiccups� that landed him on trial and facing possible execution.
I thinks it’s because of the way the story is written, so dispassionately, that makes it so compelling. The characters are fully fleshed out and you want to cheer for almost all of them. Pete’s best friend, David West, came from very humble beginnings, but became an attorney and eventually POTUS, all the while looking out for Pete’s best interests.
So much of what happens in the story is so fantastic, yet utterly believable, once you accept the premise of the ACIP. I found that I could not stop reading this book, andI wanted to know how certain dramatic plot points would be resolved. I don’t tend to like science fiction, but this is written more like a history book, for a history that hasn’t happened yet. I can only hope that humanity turns out as well as this story says, but we have a long way to go.
An absolute recommend!
I am astounded at how much I enjoyed this book. It was written in 1996, and the story goes from 1991-2050. Every chapter starts with a brief summary of what happened in the world during that time, and at times the story is a bit prescient. The story is narrated by a computer, an Intel 22g CP, and written in a dispassionate, journalistic style, which really fits the story. The computer wrote the story in seven minutes, but it took his owner, a journalist 2 1/2 days to edit it.
The story starts with the world waiting for the verdict in the trial of Randall Peterson Armstrong (Pete), who is the genius inventor of The Truth Machine, which has dramatically changed the world for the better. His company, Armstrong Technologies, Inc. (ATI) has developed numerous computer systems which have benefited mankind in innumerable ways. But his biggest invention is The Truth Machine, (ACIP) which can tell with 100% accuracy if a person is telling the truth or lying. New laws are enacted that require that people submit to being “scipped � in order to hold office, obtain employment, travel internationally, get any type of license (including a parental license) or a myriad of other things. Crime becomes almost nonexistent, personal and international relationships improve, and people are generally better off because everyone must be honest. (Eventually the ACIP becomes small enough to wear on the wrist, a so you can always know the veracity of what people are saying.)
The story gives Pete’s backstory, how he was a genius at a very young age, suffered a tragedy in his family, entered Harvard at age 11, met some people who would become lifelong friends (or not) and eventually became the richest, most brilliant man in the world and changed humanity for the better. He suffered from some personality quirks, was very driven by his ambition to develop the Truth Machine, and with the exception of a few hiccups along the way, lived an exemplary life. Unfortunately, it was those “hiccups� that landed him on trial and facing possible execution.
I thinks it’s because of the way the story is written, so dispassionately, that makes it so compelling. The characters are fully fleshed out and you want to cheer for almost all of them. Pete’s best friend, David West, came from very humble beginnings, but became an attorney and eventually POTUS, all the while looking out for Pete’s best interests.
So much of what happens in the story is so fantastic, yet utterly believable, once you accept the premise of the ACIP. I found that I could not stop reading this book, andI wanted to know how certain dramatic plot points would be resolved. I don’t tend to like science fiction, but this is written more like a history book, for a history that hasn’t happened yet. I can only hope that humanity turns out as well as this story says, but we have a long way to go.
An absolute recommend!
November 8, 2007
This book does not actually deserve the stars given. The stars, instead, are given for the concept that underpins it all, what gave life to the book as a whole. The story itself is actually quite poorly told, but it introduces an interesting if unsatisfying look at truth and intelligence. Just ignore the morality play and you'll get along fine.
June 24, 2022
3 stars for execution, but 5 for the foot on the gas pedal fever dream utopia that results from not being able to lie about eating that cookie
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
September 7, 2012
Concept: Must Read. Double the stars.
Execution: 3 Stars.
I read this when it first came out and thought it was one of the best books ever written. My copy was lost in one of my moves, and over the years it stuck in my head, but I couldn't confirm if it was as good as I remembered.
When I picked up the Kindle edition recently, I began reading it again. The ideas are still amazing, and even knowing how it ended, I read through it very quickly.
However, the writing is very amateurish. The omniscient point of view that pops into and out of different characters' heads willy-nilly from paragraph to paragraph is extremely distracting. Each chapter is preceded with a page or so of predictions that, while attempting to set the stage for what is happening with the main characters, is dry and not particularly necessary for the story or concept. The characters are a bit too black and white for my tastes, but the simplicity keeps the reader focused on the idea, which is the important part.
Execution: 3 Stars.
I read this when it first came out and thought it was one of the best books ever written. My copy was lost in one of my moves, and over the years it stuck in my head, but I couldn't confirm if it was as good as I remembered.
When I picked up the Kindle edition recently, I began reading it again. The ideas are still amazing, and even knowing how it ended, I read through it very quickly.
However, the writing is very amateurish. The omniscient point of view that pops into and out of different characters' heads willy-nilly from paragraph to paragraph is extremely distracting. Each chapter is preceded with a page or so of predictions that, while attempting to set the stage for what is happening with the main characters, is dry and not particularly necessary for the story or concept. The characters are a bit too black and white for my tastes, but the simplicity keeps the reader focused on the idea, which is the important part.
June 5, 2022
This novel is a classic example of speculative fiction: taking one idea - development of an infallible lie detector - and observing how it transforms the world. The narrative uses both journalistic-style excerpts and descriptions and personal stories of the inventor and the people around him. One of the most interesting themes is the corruption of a high concept through personal motives. The theme around the nature of truth is not really explored, although it seems very pertinent in the context. A well-structured and engaging read.
August 8, 2010
I wanted to like this book because I thought the concept was interesting and had a lot of potential. The truth is a tricky subject. We often think we'd like to know the truth, but at the same time the truth can be frightening or hurtful. Would a world free of deception be a place in which we want to live?
My first disappointment is that it took nearly half the book for the truth machine to even be invented. Up to that point, we read about the childhoods and young adult lives of our main characters, Pete and David, as well as the founding of Pete's company, ATI. I don't consider myself to be an impatient person, but I felt like I was sitting through a bunch of boring stuff waiting for what I really wanted and knew was coming. Character development is important, and we do get a good dose of the histories of the main characters. A character's history isn't enough. though. We need to understand our characters' motivations and personalities, which doesn't come through clearly.
Pete is two-dimensional: he's brilliant and is obsessed with preventing crime because of his brother. He doesn't feel real, though. He has no real flaws and he never questions himself. He begins the book as a child and feels as though he never really outgrows his childish perspective of the world.
David is charismatic and intelligent, but beyond that, his motivations are unclear. It seems like he's supposed to be the friendly voice of the "other side", but he never says or does much that solidifies this position.
Finally, once the truth machine comes into play, we'll see all the complex societal impacts, both good and bad, right? Well, no, not really. The negative consequences are mostly glossed over and we're expected to believe that utopia follows. This world might be a little more believable if we could see the consequences for ourselves. Instead, we're simply told dryly by the narrator what happens, with few details. There's never much of a question of whether a truth machine is good or bad; Halperin tells us and that's that.
This book definitely wears its politics on its sleeve. Don't get me wrong: some of the best sci-fi makes political statements, but the authors usually employ enough finesse and subtlety that even someone who disagrees can still enjoy the story. I didn't find that to be the case here. This book presents a clear tough-on-crime, pro-death penalty view and doesn't give much space to the counter-arguments. The author even includes a section at the end that implores the reader to the creation of a real truth machine, which is just plain loony.
Overall, this book feels like a huge missed opportunity. Maybe I was expecting the wrong kind of story, but this book just didn't leave me satisfied. I didn't care about the characters and the story practically ignored the most interesting parts of its premise.
My first disappointment is that it took nearly half the book for the truth machine to even be invented. Up to that point, we read about the childhoods and young adult lives of our main characters, Pete and David, as well as the founding of Pete's company, ATI. I don't consider myself to be an impatient person, but I felt like I was sitting through a bunch of boring stuff waiting for what I really wanted and knew was coming. Character development is important, and we do get a good dose of the histories of the main characters. A character's history isn't enough. though. We need to understand our characters' motivations and personalities, which doesn't come through clearly.
Pete is two-dimensional: he's brilliant and is obsessed with preventing crime because of his brother. He doesn't feel real, though. He has no real flaws and he never questions himself. He begins the book as a child and feels as though he never really outgrows his childish perspective of the world.
David is charismatic and intelligent, but beyond that, his motivations are unclear. It seems like he's supposed to be the friendly voice of the "other side", but he never says or does much that solidifies this position.
Finally, once the truth machine comes into play, we'll see all the complex societal impacts, both good and bad, right? Well, no, not really. The negative consequences are mostly glossed over and we're expected to believe that utopia follows. This world might be a little more believable if we could see the consequences for ourselves. Instead, we're simply told dryly by the narrator what happens, with few details. There's never much of a question of whether a truth machine is good or bad; Halperin tells us and that's that.
This book definitely wears its politics on its sleeve. Don't get me wrong: some of the best sci-fi makes political statements, but the authors usually employ enough finesse and subtlety that even someone who disagrees can still enjoy the story. I didn't find that to be the case here. This book presents a clear tough-on-crime, pro-death penalty view and doesn't give much space to the counter-arguments. The author even includes a section at the end that implores the reader to the creation of a real truth machine, which is just plain loony.
Overall, this book feels like a huge missed opportunity. Maybe I was expecting the wrong kind of story, but this book just didn't leave me satisfied. I didn't care about the characters and the story practically ignored the most interesting parts of its premise.
February 4, 2025
I'm changing this to one star because the more I think about it, the more this book annoys me. There was another miscarriage of justice I didn't realize until later, every time David does anything, it's described as "good-natured" or "good-humoured," like Halperin can't 'show' charisma but boy can he 'tell' it.
This is the kind of book that you keep reading because, at any moment, it should be so good. "Prepare to have your conception of truth rocked to its very foundation." That's the tagline for the book. And that promise is not kept. I think I can explain what I thought of this book best by going over three topics: two Halperin misunderstands, and one thing he did really well.
First, Halperin understands how to make a great sci-fi concept in response to his culture's political issues. If you're gonna write sci-fi, the ideas you wrestle with are one of the most important parts of the story. Violent crime is hardly the focus of today's world, but it was certainly more prevalent when he wrote this in '96 (as far as I know, Nietzsche was rejected back in the 90s, so I'm not sure anyone would've predicted his influence on neoliberalism and the rise of- y'know what? never mind. I'll shut up). Swift and Sure and, to a lesser extent, the Truth Machine, are excellent responses to an overwhelming fear of violent crime. Unrealistic, and probably not effective, but you want that in a good sci-fi premise, so you can play around with it. On paper, it was the perfect idea. This allows Halperin to play around with security vs freedom in a way I haven't seen before, it allows him to ask how valuable an innocent life is, and whether or not we really did want to know the truth. It truly is a great concept, rife with potential.
Secondly, Halperin misunderstands human nature, and that prevents him from doing anything interesting with this concept. He lays his cards on the table when universalist unitarianism becomes the most popular religion in the world, which is pretty short-sighted, considering its the one religion that tells you that you don't really need to follow it to go to heaven, or for God to like you, or anything like that. But I digress. The important part is what this informs us about Halperin's worldview. Essentially, he thinks all people are good, and that we will inevitably progress towards utopia. Which, if you've ever met another human or ever been honest with yourself, is ludicrous. He seems to think that every human would simply do the right thing and that there would be no issue of unity or maturity. For example, after the truth machine is miniaturized and everyone on earth starts wearing one on their wrist (yeah, right), so that everyone can always know whether anyone else around them is ever lying, he predicts that there would be practically no interpersonal conflict ever again. That might be true if everyone was super emotionally mature. But in reality, there is a lot of grace needed to maintain real, genuine relationships. There are plenty of times where you need to say "No, I'm fine, don't worry," when you are upset, or angry, because you cannot let yourself be upset. Because you know you are the one in the wrong and you are going to choose to not let your emotions get the better of you. The truth machine eliminates grace. Ironically, he does seem to think civilization would collapse if the truth machine was taken away, because everyone is so used to relying on it to keep them honest, moral, and upright, which mirrors how we would sink into depravity if it weren't for God's common grace.
Thirdly, Halperin misunderstands storytelling to an incredible extent. Everything I said in the paragraph above would not matter NEAR as much if it wasn't for the fact that no one has ever told Halperin to "show, don't tell." The two worst examples of this that come to mind are: In the first five chapters, it's established that Pete's nervous tick is rocking back and forth and biting his tongue. And he does this repeatedly throughout the story. In the last few chapters of the book, Halperin writes something along the lines of "Pete tried not to rock or bite his tongue, the two giveaways of his mental distress." I wish I remembered the exact quote, because it was a worse violation than this. The other example is when, after repeatedly informing Pete and the reader that the World Tribunal rarely grants amnesty, David thinks to himself "Big deal. The World Tribunal always considers amnesty, but hardly ever grants it." That's the direct quote. Do you see what I mean about wasted potential? Cut off the last clause of that sentence and you've got a great storytelling sentence. A huge part of the problem with how this story is written lies in the narrator- a programmed journalist robot. Barring my bias against books written by computers, this is the worst possible choice you can make for narration. 22g, the aforementioned robot, makes no effort whatsoever to try to write this as if it were a novel, or a biography, or anything interesting. Instead, it drains the story of any emotion and writes as dryly as robotically possible. On top of that, 22g repeatedly interjects unhelpful, unfunny comments that serve only to interrupt the narrative. There is a lot in this book that should have been cut out for the sake of the central plot. I can go on and on railing against the writing of this book (flat main characters, a thematically contradictory ending, etc. etc.), but really, all I need to say is Halpering should've hired an editor before he published this himself.
In the end, this book is getting two stars from me, because there were multiple times I thought to myself, "Oh, here we go, now the story is picking up! Here's the payoff!" And as disappointed as I am, the concept and potential of this book are still so rife. I would love to see a similar idea handled by a more experienced author. Highlights in this book, however, were the actual betrayal itself (as hinted at in the book's synopsis), and every single scene with either Reece or Shaw. I'm glad I read it, and I am glad to be done with it.
This is the kind of book that you keep reading because, at any moment, it should be so good. "Prepare to have your conception of truth rocked to its very foundation." That's the tagline for the book. And that promise is not kept. I think I can explain what I thought of this book best by going over three topics: two Halperin misunderstands, and one thing he did really well.
First, Halperin understands how to make a great sci-fi concept in response to his culture's political issues. If you're gonna write sci-fi, the ideas you wrestle with are one of the most important parts of the story. Violent crime is hardly the focus of today's world, but it was certainly more prevalent when he wrote this in '96 (as far as I know, Nietzsche was rejected back in the 90s, so I'm not sure anyone would've predicted his influence on neoliberalism and the rise of- y'know what? never mind. I'll shut up). Swift and Sure and, to a lesser extent, the Truth Machine, are excellent responses to an overwhelming fear of violent crime. Unrealistic, and probably not effective, but you want that in a good sci-fi premise, so you can play around with it. On paper, it was the perfect idea. This allows Halperin to play around with security vs freedom in a way I haven't seen before, it allows him to ask how valuable an innocent life is, and whether or not we really did want to know the truth. It truly is a great concept, rife with potential.
Secondly, Halperin misunderstands human nature, and that prevents him from doing anything interesting with this concept. He lays his cards on the table when universalist unitarianism becomes the most popular religion in the world, which is pretty short-sighted, considering its the one religion that tells you that you don't really need to follow it to go to heaven, or for God to like you, or anything like that. But I digress. The important part is what this informs us about Halperin's worldview. Essentially, he thinks all people are good, and that we will inevitably progress towards utopia. Which, if you've ever met another human or ever been honest with yourself, is ludicrous. He seems to think that every human would simply do the right thing and that there would be no issue of unity or maturity. For example, after the truth machine is miniaturized and everyone on earth starts wearing one on their wrist (yeah, right), so that everyone can always know whether anyone else around them is ever lying, he predicts that there would be practically no interpersonal conflict ever again. That might be true if everyone was super emotionally mature. But in reality, there is a lot of grace needed to maintain real, genuine relationships. There are plenty of times where you need to say "No, I'm fine, don't worry," when you are upset, or angry, because you cannot let yourself be upset. Because you know you are the one in the wrong and you are going to choose to not let your emotions get the better of you. The truth machine eliminates grace. Ironically, he does seem to think civilization would collapse if the truth machine was taken away, because everyone is so used to relying on it to keep them honest, moral, and upright, which mirrors how we would sink into depravity if it weren't for God's common grace.
Thirdly, Halperin misunderstands storytelling to an incredible extent. Everything I said in the paragraph above would not matter NEAR as much if it wasn't for the fact that no one has ever told Halperin to "show, don't tell." The two worst examples of this that come to mind are: In the first five chapters, it's established that Pete's nervous tick is rocking back and forth and biting his tongue. And he does this repeatedly throughout the story. In the last few chapters of the book, Halperin writes something along the lines of "Pete tried not to rock or bite his tongue, the two giveaways of his mental distress." I wish I remembered the exact quote, because it was a worse violation than this. The other example is when, after repeatedly informing Pete and the reader that the World Tribunal rarely grants amnesty, David thinks to himself "Big deal. The World Tribunal always considers amnesty, but hardly ever grants it." That's the direct quote. Do you see what I mean about wasted potential? Cut off the last clause of that sentence and you've got a great storytelling sentence. A huge part of the problem with how this story is written lies in the narrator- a programmed journalist robot. Barring my bias against books written by computers, this is the worst possible choice you can make for narration. 22g, the aforementioned robot, makes no effort whatsoever to try to write this as if it were a novel, or a biography, or anything interesting. Instead, it drains the story of any emotion and writes as dryly as robotically possible. On top of that, 22g repeatedly interjects unhelpful, unfunny comments that serve only to interrupt the narrative. There is a lot in this book that should have been cut out for the sake of the central plot. I can go on and on railing against the writing of this book (flat main characters, a thematically contradictory ending, etc. etc.), but really, all I need to say is Halpering should've hired an editor before he published this himself.
In the end, this book is getting two stars from me, because there were multiple times I thought to myself, "Oh, here we go, now the story is picking up! Here's the payoff!" And as disappointed as I am, the concept and potential of this book are still so rife. I would love to see a similar idea handled by a more experienced author. Highlights in this book, however, were the actual betrayal itself (as hinted at in the book's synopsis), and every single scene with either Reece or Shaw. I'm glad I read it, and I am glad to be done with it.
September 1, 2017
I don't think that any marriage would survive this scenario. I need to be able to ask my husband whether I look fat and have him lie to me.
June 1, 2016
In the future, according to author James L. Halperin, world crime can be wiped out by a 100% accurate lie detector. Citizens of the world are required to pass lie detector tests in order to gain a driver's license, have children, move to a different state, get hired, and so on. However, the very inventor of this amazing lie detector has committed a horrible crime, and must hide his criminal secret from the world. (And to say anything more on the matter would be a plot spoiler.)
It's a good, thought-provoking premise. Unfortunately, the characters are poorly developed, and there are so many plot-holes that I was unable to suspend my disbelief. Good beginning, good ending. Really, really slow middle.
Call me a pessimist, but I find it extremely hard to believe that Earth will have a functional World Government within the next fifty years, or many of the other things that Halperin predicts. Can you see 60% of the current American public voting for "the Swift And Sure Anti-Crime Bill," which guarantees immediate execution for any person who commits three felonies? Too many innocents would be killed in the pre-Truth Machine era. I doubt many people would support this unless criminals could be detected with absolute 100% certainty.
As for the Truth Machine itself...there was not enough evidence in the book to support this foolproof machine. People would come up with a way to fool it. That's what hackers are best at. Humanity consists largely of innovators; we improve upon other people's ideas and inventions. Some desperate people would start training themselves to believe their own lies as truth, thereby tricking the machines. Programmers would tamper with the machines and then sell their results to rich criminals. And computers have a looooooong way to go before they reach a level even close to flawless operation...if they ever will.
Even if you are willing to suspend your disbelief to the heights which this book demands, there isn't much to like. It's philosophy with a thin veneer of plot thrown over it.
It's a good, thought-provoking premise. Unfortunately, the characters are poorly developed, and there are so many plot-holes that I was unable to suspend my disbelief. Good beginning, good ending. Really, really slow middle.
Call me a pessimist, but I find it extremely hard to believe that Earth will have a functional World Government within the next fifty years, or many of the other things that Halperin predicts. Can you see 60% of the current American public voting for "the Swift And Sure Anti-Crime Bill," which guarantees immediate execution for any person who commits three felonies? Too many innocents would be killed in the pre-Truth Machine era. I doubt many people would support this unless criminals could be detected with absolute 100% certainty.
As for the Truth Machine itself...there was not enough evidence in the book to support this foolproof machine. People would come up with a way to fool it. That's what hackers are best at. Humanity consists largely of innovators; we improve upon other people's ideas and inventions. Some desperate people would start training themselves to believe their own lies as truth, thereby tricking the machines. Programmers would tamper with the machines and then sell their results to rich criminals. And computers have a looooooong way to go before they reach a level even close to flawless operation...if they ever will.
Even if you are willing to suspend your disbelief to the heights which this book demands, there isn't much to like. It's philosophy with a thin veneer of plot thrown over it.
March 10, 2014
This book had some potential for a good and interesting read, but the style broke the flow of the narrative for me. It is supposedly written by the computer of a Journalist so the writing is dry and "factual", like a news story with as little opinion inserted as possible. It read a bit more like a high school history text than a novel.
The prognostications from the date the book was written are interesting to see, especially where the author hypothesized where the world was heading in the future and what possible events and consequences are. The further one goes into the future, the less I found myself able to suspend disbelief entirely for the middle of the novel. World events were predicated on events from the past that didn't quite happen. Predictive models were off in many ways. On the other hand, once our characters step fully into the history of this novel and become active participants, the novel's predications regain their believability.
Unfortunately, the characters come off as a little too perfect for me. Pete's flaws seem to be that he's just too smart for this world. David and Diana seems even less flawed. It all seems to feed into a worldview that believes it is the highly intelligent that can save mankind from itself. There's a thread of utopianism that if we give up privacy and free will we can fix our problems. It seems, at least in this narrative, that the author seems to favor such a solution. I don't see many pitfalls with his proposed solution as portrayed in this novel. I've been told in later books things start to come unraveled. Overall I'd just like to see more depth from this book.
The prognostications from the date the book was written are interesting to see, especially where the author hypothesized where the world was heading in the future and what possible events and consequences are. The further one goes into the future, the less I found myself able to suspend disbelief entirely for the middle of the novel. World events were predicated on events from the past that didn't quite happen. Predictive models were off in many ways. On the other hand, once our characters step fully into the history of this novel and become active participants, the novel's predications regain their believability.
Unfortunately, the characters come off as a little too perfect for me. Pete's flaws seem to be that he's just too smart for this world. David and Diana seems even less flawed. It all seems to feed into a worldview that believes it is the highly intelligent that can save mankind from itself. There's a thread of utopianism that if we give up privacy and free will we can fix our problems. It seems, at least in this narrative, that the author seems to favor such a solution. I don't see many pitfalls with his proposed solution as portrayed in this novel. I've been told in later books things start to come unraveled. Overall I'd just like to see more depth from this book.
March 5, 2014
If ŷ would allow, I'd give 3.5 stars, averaged for concept combined with execution, but it doesn't, so I rounded up. I read this book quite a long time ago, when it was first released, and something brought it to mind recently. I really need to re-read to give a reasonable review, but my Books To Read list is long, and always growing... For now, I think I should recommend it to readers based on this: the *ideas* were fascinating. If I recall correctly, the writing and mechanics were not so thrilling. Still, despite any literary shortcomings, the concept of a "truth machine" -- an infallible lie detector -- and the exploration of the resulting impact on all aspects of a society where all possibility of deception has been eliminated was thought-provoking enough for me to recommend it all these years later.
May 21, 2016
3. 5
Ovo je priča o stroju koju nam priča stroj (ili umjetna inteligencija), priča o napretku znanosti i potrebi mijenjanja ljudske naravi koja svijet vodi u propast. Najzanimljiviji su možda novinski naslovi za pojedinu godinu, s obzirom da je knjiga napisana 1995., svi kasniji su bile spekulacije. Bilo bi zabavno uspoređivati fikciju i stvarnost...priča prati razvoj i ostvarivanje ideje o stroju istine te životnu priču njenog tvorca. Na mjestima možda previše melodramatična, ipak, zanimljiva i potiče na razmišljanje.
Mislim da je trebalo više opisati društveni učinak stroja, a manje se usredotočiti na Peteov život.
Ovo je priča o stroju koju nam priča stroj (ili umjetna inteligencija), priča o napretku znanosti i potrebi mijenjanja ljudske naravi koja svijet vodi u propast. Najzanimljiviji su možda novinski naslovi za pojedinu godinu, s obzirom da je knjiga napisana 1995., svi kasniji su bile spekulacije. Bilo bi zabavno uspoređivati fikciju i stvarnost...priča prati razvoj i ostvarivanje ideje o stroju istine te životnu priču njenog tvorca. Na mjestima možda previše melodramatična, ipak, zanimljiva i potiče na razmišljanje.
Mislim da je trebalo više opisati društveni učinak stroja, a manje se usredotočiti na Peteov život.
January 6, 2013
I am very surprised that I enjoyed this book as much as I did. Normally one of my favorite subjects to read is dystopian fiction, but in The Truth Machine, Halperin seems to present a rather utopian vision of the future.
Most of his main characters have a strong sense of morality and achieve great success in their lives. Man's relationship with machines is a beneficial one. Rather than warn us about too many technological advances, Halperin shows us the good that could come from technology; instead of cautioning us against our reliance on machines, he (well, his characters) suggests that we as readers examine our own flawed human nature. It's not the machines that will destroy us in the end; it's how we use that technology that will determine our future (guns don't kill people... you know the rest). He seems to want us to realize our imminent destruction as a species if we continue on as we are now.
I understand where Halperin is coming from in his message to his readers, but I also kind of disagree with some of it. In his book, no one (except for Pete) can lie about anything because of the truth machine. Privacy is basically a thing of the past ["Privacy indulges secrecy, and it is secrecy that now most imperils our survival" (188)]. Civilizations have been established on the moon, underwater, and on Mars. Nearly all diseases have been cured. The average human lifespan is well past one hundred years, and cryonic freezing after death has become a societal norm. Even at the end of the book, scientists continue to make strides towards stopping the aging process and achieving immortality.
Some people might think that this sounds like the perfect vision of mankind's future, but as a reader and as a human being, I am not one of them. Even though I still prefer to read about dystopia over utopia, I still very much enjoyed Halperin's book for the unique ideas he presents and for the thoughts he provokes. Even though his prose isn't very pretty, its simplicity does reflect his vision of an honest, straightforward society in the future.
And even though in his society of the future his narrator writes "today misunderstandings between man and machine are rare" (25), I was glad to see his characters create The United States Software Act, S. 2343: "to ban the programming of survival instinct, emotion, or free will into any machine" (180). The book's narrator (itself a computer, an Intel 22g CP) even says, "I hope you won't be offended if I speculate that, were it not for these laws, the human race might no longer find itself at the top of the metaphorical 'food chain'" (181). See, I knew the machines were out to get us...
Most of his main characters have a strong sense of morality and achieve great success in their lives. Man's relationship with machines is a beneficial one. Rather than warn us about too many technological advances, Halperin shows us the good that could come from technology; instead of cautioning us against our reliance on machines, he (well, his characters) suggests that we as readers examine our own flawed human nature. It's not the machines that will destroy us in the end; it's how we use that technology that will determine our future (guns don't kill people... you know the rest). He seems to want us to realize our imminent destruction as a species if we continue on as we are now.
I understand where Halperin is coming from in his message to his readers, but I also kind of disagree with some of it. In his book, no one (except for Pete) can lie about anything because of the truth machine. Privacy is basically a thing of the past ["Privacy indulges secrecy, and it is secrecy that now most imperils our survival" (188)]. Civilizations have been established on the moon, underwater, and on Mars. Nearly all diseases have been cured. The average human lifespan is well past one hundred years, and cryonic freezing after death has become a societal norm. Even at the end of the book, scientists continue to make strides towards stopping the aging process and achieving immortality.
Some people might think that this sounds like the perfect vision of mankind's future, but as a reader and as a human being, I am not one of them. Even though I still prefer to read about dystopia over utopia, I still very much enjoyed Halperin's book for the unique ideas he presents and for the thoughts he provokes. Even though his prose isn't very pretty, its simplicity does reflect his vision of an honest, straightforward society in the future.
And even though in his society of the future his narrator writes "today misunderstandings between man and machine are rare" (25), I was glad to see his characters create The United States Software Act, S. 2343: "to ban the programming of survival instinct, emotion, or free will into any machine" (180). The book's narrator (itself a computer, an Intel 22g CP) even says, "I hope you won't be offended if I speculate that, were it not for these laws, the human race might no longer find itself at the top of the metaphorical 'food chain'" (181). See, I knew the machines were out to get us...
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
March 30, 2014
I first read this book as a teenager - it was my first 'SF' book that wasn't Star Trek or Space Opera, and I remember picking it up purely because I had just discovered the description 'speculative fiction' and this had it emblazoned across the cover. On that first reading I was blown away by it. A few (!) years later and I have just finished the second read.
OK, it's not the best put together novel - it jumps by random time frames between chapters, the characters are a bit one-dimensional and there is a lot of annoying interruptions from the author - a futuristic journalist computer. BUT, on the other hand, it does exactly what it says on the cover.
The author poses the question 'what would the world be like if someone invented a Truth Machine?' Then he decides what would happen in today's world to make someone WANT to invent it, what hoops would have to be jumped through to design it, how the world would react just knowing it is in the pipeline and what the final effects of it are. That's a lot to get across to the reader and I personally think the author has done a bloody good job.
Pete, the main character, is a genius, whose brother is kidnapped and murdered by someone released early from jail. That one thing is the catalyst for all the events that follow and, eventually, is also the thing behind Pete's downfall. But even around the main story, there is a lot to think about - the author gives little 'historic' facts at the start of each chapter, detailing events that are happening in this future world. So real are these that, at the start, I kept having to double check when the book had been published to decide whether those 'facts' were real events or made up future ones! One of the things I really liked was the idea that starting to read 'real' books again is encouraged in the future, as a way of using up the trees that are flourishing in a pollution free world are are threatening to overwhelm everything - brilliant.
So, to sum up, no, this isn't the greatest novel of all time, but it is well worth reading by anyone interested in how our world might turn out and who likes to have a bit of a think around what they read.
OK, it's not the best put together novel - it jumps by random time frames between chapters, the characters are a bit one-dimensional and there is a lot of annoying interruptions from the author - a futuristic journalist computer. BUT, on the other hand, it does exactly what it says on the cover.
The author poses the question 'what would the world be like if someone invented a Truth Machine?' Then he decides what would happen in today's world to make someone WANT to invent it, what hoops would have to be jumped through to design it, how the world would react just knowing it is in the pipeline and what the final effects of it are. That's a lot to get across to the reader and I personally think the author has done a bloody good job.
Pete, the main character, is a genius, whose brother is kidnapped and murdered by someone released early from jail. That one thing is the catalyst for all the events that follow and, eventually, is also the thing behind Pete's downfall. But even around the main story, there is a lot to think about - the author gives little 'historic' facts at the start of each chapter, detailing events that are happening in this future world. So real are these that, at the start, I kept having to double check when the book had been published to decide whether those 'facts' were real events or made up future ones! One of the things I really liked was the idea that starting to read 'real' books again is encouraged in the future, as a way of using up the trees that are flourishing in a pollution free world are are threatening to overwhelm everything - brilliant.
So, to sum up, no, this isn't the greatest novel of all time, but it is well worth reading by anyone interested in how our world might turn out and who likes to have a bit of a think around what they read.
April 23, 2011
The Truth Machine had been on my To Read list for quite some time; I found a copy of it at a used book store last August & finally gave it a whirl.
This novel tells the story of Randall Petersen "Pete" Armstrong, who in July 2050, is facing trial for a series of very serious crimes. He also was the main developer of the titular Truth Machine - an invention that probably saved humankind. What his crimes are and how he came to commit them, as well as the detailed history behind the development of the Truth Machine is covered in flashback form, starting with his childhood in the mid-1990's.
This was a very interesting read, even if I don't necessarily agree with the entire premise. The news recaps at the beginning of each section were quite well done; I had to double-check the pub date of the book to see where the cutoff was! There's quite a bit of character development, and the plot flows along nicely, tho bogging down a bit at the end. The number of characters can be a little difficult to follow at times, and the "bad guy" is pretty obvious, right from his first appearance.
At times, this felt like a Grisham/Clancy best-seller (meant in a good way). It's probably too long to make into a movie; but it might make an decent mini-series. The scenarios are very believable; Halperin must have done a bunch of research to make his near-future technology as credible as it is: his PCD's = web-enabled cellphones, for example.
Recommended to those interested in near-future SF.
This novel tells the story of Randall Petersen "Pete" Armstrong, who in July 2050, is facing trial for a series of very serious crimes. He also was the main developer of the titular Truth Machine - an invention that probably saved humankind. What his crimes are and how he came to commit them, as well as the detailed history behind the development of the Truth Machine is covered in flashback form, starting with his childhood in the mid-1990's.
This was a very interesting read, even if I don't necessarily agree with the entire premise. The news recaps at the beginning of each section were quite well done; I had to double-check the pub date of the book to see where the cutoff was! There's quite a bit of character development, and the plot flows along nicely, tho bogging down a bit at the end. The number of characters can be a little difficult to follow at times, and the "bad guy" is pretty obvious, right from his first appearance.
At times, this felt like a Grisham/Clancy best-seller (meant in a good way). It's probably too long to make into a movie; but it might make an decent mini-series. The scenarios are very believable; Halperin must have done a bunch of research to make his near-future technology as credible as it is: his PCD's = web-enabled cellphones, for example.
Recommended to those interested in near-future SF.
December 24, 2014
I loved this book! I can't believe Halperin wrote this in 1996 as it seems to current today. The basic premise is that crime, terrorism, nuclear holocaust is rising and eventually going to destroy the world. The only way to save it is to invent a Truth Machine so that no one can lie again. Therefore no one even considers lying or committing a crime (much less murder, terrorism etc.) since they would be found out immediately. Amazing job of exploring the ramifications for society and actually creating a unified world government. Halperin is actually very persuasive and totally sold me on the exceptional cost/benefits to all aspects of life. Essentially it involves trading personal privacy rights for huge gains in societal benefits and safety.
I need to explore other offerings by this author with whom I was unfamiliar but was absolutely blown away by the novel concept, logic and enjoyment of this book! It is like a History of the Future. Read it!
I need to explore other offerings by this author with whom I was unfamiliar but was absolutely blown away by the novel concept, logic and enjoyment of this book! It is like a History of the Future. Read it!
January 8, 2015
Zanimljivo je kako je sam izdavač ovo svrstao u napetice.
Tematika ipak spada u fantastiku, e sad je li baš znanstvena recimo da može biti.
Mada davno pročitano (1997) dobro se sjećam kako mi je tada bilo vrlo zabavno pa i ocjenu dajem iz devedesetih (kažu: "prvi dojam je uvijek točan" :) )
Ovdje nije toliko bitno kako izgraditi 100% učinkovit detektor istine nego razrada ideje koje bi to sve sociološke promjene donijelo društvu.
Probajte i sami zamisliti svijet gdje je apsolutno nemoguće slagati, a ne može se postati političar bez testiranja (ako ovo zadnje nije aktualno onda što je)
Može li se takva naprava prevariti?
Preko 4
Pročitajte, mogli bi se zabaviti.
Tematika ipak spada u fantastiku, e sad je li baš znanstvena recimo da može biti.
Mada davno pročitano (1997) dobro se sjećam kako mi je tada bilo vrlo zabavno pa i ocjenu dajem iz devedesetih (kažu: "prvi dojam je uvijek točan" :) )
Ovdje nije toliko bitno kako izgraditi 100% učinkovit detektor istine nego razrada ideje koje bi to sve sociološke promjene donijelo društvu.
Probajte i sami zamisliti svijet gdje je apsolutno nemoguće slagati, a ne može se postati političar bez testiranja (ako ovo zadnje nije aktualno onda što je)
Može li se takva naprava prevariti?
Preko 4
Pročitajte, mogli bi se zabaviti.
May 19, 2020
To all intents and purposes it's more a thought experiment than a novel. The characterisation is perfunctory, the plot episodic and the central idea of an infallible lie detector inadequately explored.
I found a number of its base assumptions to be problematic - private finance and big business are central to any positive
developments in society;
killing criminals is OK;
and crucially, that a Truth Machine is a good idea in the first place, and would be accepted unquestioningly by a quiescent populace.
It felt like the author only looked at the "technical fix" side of the story and didn't even consider the political and social consequences of all these assumptions.
I found a number of its base assumptions to be problematic - private finance and big business are central to any positive
developments in society;
killing criminals is OK;
and crucially, that a Truth Machine is a good idea in the first place, and would be accepted unquestioningly by a quiescent populace.
It felt like the author only looked at the "technical fix" side of the story and didn't even consider the political and social consequences of all these assumptions.
April 2, 2012
This is the single worst book I've ever read: I considered burning it in protest, but librarians don't like getting charred remnants of their books in the return bin.
Despite starting with an intriguing premise --- what if it were impossible for people to lie? --- Halperin manages to drain it of any interest. The Truth Machine makes Atlas Shrugged look like a masterpiece of tight plotting and brilliant characterization, while rivalling Neal Stephenson for the sheer volume of infodumping.
Even one star is too much for this.
Despite starting with an intriguing premise --- what if it were impossible for people to lie? --- Halperin manages to drain it of any interest. The Truth Machine makes Atlas Shrugged look like a masterpiece of tight plotting and brilliant characterization, while rivalling Neal Stephenson for the sheer volume of infodumping.
Even one star is too much for this.
June 20, 2019
This book was overly political but still very interesting. Since the author tried to predict events that happened shortly after the book came out, many of the predictions were proved immediately wrong, which was more interesting than anything else. I was interested that the author was incredibly pessimistic with some predictions regarding the behavior of the human race, but incredibly optimistic with his predictions regarding technology and healthcare. Still, the premise of the truth machine is interesting and well explored. Worth a read.
February 1, 2020
It's rare that I rate a book this high. Although it started slow and took a while to follow all the characters (there is a guide at the front of book) eventually I became more invested in the characters.
If you don't want to take the time to read the story, reading the news headlines at the beginning of each chapter is fascinating. The author had some good ideas about how the world might be in the future with only the knowledge of the world up to 1996.
It's a good conversation starter and should probably be resurrected for people today to read.
If you don't want to take the time to read the story, reading the news headlines at the beginning of each chapter is fascinating. The author had some good ideas about how the world might be in the future with only the knowledge of the world up to 1996.
It's a good conversation starter and should probably be resurrected for people today to read.
August 11, 2007
This book was recommend to me by Cameron because he thought it was something I would like. He was right and have been reading more ever since. It is a good read but the writing could of been better. I like it from beginning to end and I like the thought that went into the future world James L. Halperin has created with the idea "What if nobody could lie?".
April 5, 2020
This book fascinating, and very thought-provoking. Since it's about the future, starting around 1995, it's interesting to see that some events described by the author are quite prescient, other developments are way off. But it's still intriguing, and it's obvious that Halperin conducted some thorough research in the writing. I would love to know someone like Pete Armstrong.
January 7, 2015
Cannot believe this was written in 1995, so very relevant today. Fascinated by every detail of this book.
June 10, 2017
Honestly, it just made me feel bad, reading what a dude in 1997 thought we'd be like in 2017 and being so far off because he was too optimistic...
August 26, 2007
every secrets will bring.
December 30, 2023
This book was written in 1996, with the story beginning in the 90s, going through to 2050. I love books written in the past, about the future. Especially when some of the "future" is in our past. You get me? Each chapter starts with a world news update. Some of Halperin's predictions were pretty good (eg the narrator is AI), and others were outdated (it's been a while since I've heard anything about Motorola or Kodak). We follow the life of Pete Armstrong, a child genius, becoming an adult of incredible intellect with a photographic memory. He spends decades inventing a truth machine, which has 100% accuracy, and it changes the world for the better. Violent crimes are drastically reduced, and the truth machine is used extensively in business, and also quite a lot in private. Then there's the "complication". The book really needed that to round it off. I was interested in the social commentary but less interested in the politics (although World Government was intriguing). This book had the tiniest font I have ever seen outside of the bible. SO TINY. And it wasn't fantastic writing, and long. But I still found it fascinating.
October 9, 2023
When a friend recommended me this book, they just said it would be an "easy read", and when I started, I thought that with its abundance of high-tech jargon among other things, would be far from easy... Well, I was wrong! I devoured this book in a matter of a few days and ended up appreciating even the most challenging dialogs.
I also liked how each chapter opened by briefly painting the picture of what was going on as far as the economy, politics, medicine and technology advances of the time.
Some characters were predictable (I won't give any spoilers) and still made me feel something, as dispassionate as the narration is (made by a computer, btw) which was quite intriguing, even funny.
There are certain aspects of truth, humanity, and even politics, that could be debated, but I simply don't want to spoil them here. Quite an entertaining book! I highly recommend it.
I also liked how each chapter opened by briefly painting the picture of what was going on as far as the economy, politics, medicine and technology advances of the time.
Some characters were predictable (I won't give any spoilers) and still made me feel something, as dispassionate as the narration is (made by a computer, btw) which was quite intriguing, even funny.
There are certain aspects of truth, humanity, and even politics, that could be debated, but I simply don't want to spoil them here. Quite an entertaining book! I highly recommend it.
April 6, 2024
Disappointing. I think this would have worked much better as a short story; there's a lot of filler, mostly about how brilliant and wonderful the MC and his friends are. I also found some aspects of the story implausible. The impact of the Truth Machine is portrayed as universally beneficial, for example, children wear miniature versions and are unable to lie or keep secrets from their parents, which sounds positively dystopian. The Truth Machine is made an essential part of the judicial process in a very short time, used to make life and death decisions, despite there being no obvious way to test it completely. The method used in the book is to employ the (purported) Truth Machine to test the designer of the same machine when he's quizzed about its efficacy. I don't think it's much of spoiler to say this has the outcome you'd expect.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 156 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.